[HN Gopher] Subatomic particle seen changing to antiparticle and...
___________________________________________________________________
Subatomic particle seen changing to antiparticle and back for the
first time
Author : jdmark
Score : 64 points
Date : 2021-06-12 17:15 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.ox.ac.uk)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.ox.ac.uk)
| noizejoy wrote:
| The big programmer in the sky, responsible for the entire
| simulation is having fun introducing new variables, whenever our
| science gets close to the edge of having figured out all of the
| existing variables.
|
| It's like moving the cheese :-)
| codeulike wrote:
| _" There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers
| exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will
| instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more
| bizarre and inexplicable.
|
| There is another theory which states that this has already
| happened."_
|
| -- Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
| bolasanibk wrote:
| Duplicate with more discussion.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27483949
| cma wrote:
| The bigger headline is it has some kind of mass difference
| between the two that could explain the antimatter/matter
| imbalance in the universe, a major unsolved physics problem.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_p...
| (baryon asymmetry)
| [deleted]
| api wrote:
| If it's toggling back and forth and the mass changes, does this
| mean its momentum should also be changing since mass-energy are
| conserved?
|
| Seems to me that if a particle is flapping back and forth on
| mass and it's energy were not changing this would be extremely
| weird and maybe even more significant.
|
| They should try to measure this if they haven't already.
| throwaway481048 wrote:
| Is it not possible there is a (potentially massive) hole in
| our understanding of physics or perhaps even a whole
| different set of rules which we have yet to perceive and
| explore?
|
| I ask because along with the recent onset of quantum
| mechanics, proposed unified field theories, and the revived
| discussion of UFO phenomena in the US (specifically regarding
| US armed forces' interactions with "them"), many state that
| the operation of these UFOs is simply not possible under our
| defined laws of physics.
|
| Thus, is it wise for us to assume a rule which has held true
| in our relatively simple world would not change at a
| different scales of physics?
|
| I'd think it best to be open minded as we explore these new
| frontiers, but do know that we are often driven to further
| understanding by our previous understanding.
|
| Disclaimer: I am NOT a professional working within physics or
| any directly related field.
| tinco wrote:
| Yes absolutely possible and also precisely the reason we
| are looking at these particles. The way science works is
| that we call these "assumptions" laws because we have never
| seen them broken and if we do it's likely some other
| assumption is wrong or our measurements are incorrect. But
| physics is always based on experiments, and if an
| experiment would show a violation of the law of
| conservation, and that experiment is repeatable and no one
| can find a flaw in it, then the law is changed.
|
| And this is not some idle theory based in idealism, it
| actually happened in a super real way multiple times the
| most famous one being when we dropped the Newtonian "laws"
| for special relativity and quantum physics. No one liked
| it, no one was happy with it, but physics is about what
| happens in reality, and reality is what dictates what the
| laws are.
|
| You probably get some downvotes for the UFO thing, but it
| doesn't really matter. Scientists don't need UFO's to
| question their assumptions, but they can be fine
| inspiration regardless.
| R0b0t1 wrote:
| The momentum doesn't need to change. If the mass decreases it
| can just go faster.
| tzs wrote:
| If the mass changes from m0 to m1, the velocity has to
| change by a factor of m0/m1 to conserve momentum. But to
| conserve kinetic energy speed has to change by a factor of
| sqrt(m0/m1).
|
| Something else has to be involved to reconcile these
| conflicting velocity constraints.
| kukx wrote:
| Does the energy need to be conserved in the same form?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-06-12 23:00 UTC)